Stakeholder Map and Power Grid

Influence rarely matches the org chart. This finds who actually decides things.

Step 1 — the long list

Include: the sponsor, budget holder, the leaders whose teams are affected, middle managers, informal opinion leaders, the union or works council if relevant, IT/Risk/Compliance/Legal gatekeepers, and anyone who lost an argument when this change was chosen.

⚠️ That last group is important and always missing from the list. Someone advocated a different solution and was overruled. They are not neutral, and they are usually senior.

Step 2 — score each

Name	Role	Influence (1–5)	Interest (1–5)	Stance	What they want	What they fear	Owner

Stance scale: Champion · Supporter · Neutral · Sceptic · Blocker

Use T — Stakeholder Note for anyone scoring 4+ on influence.

Step 3 — the grid

   HIGH │                    │
        │   KEEP SATISFIED   │   MANAGE CLOSELY
        │   (can kill it,    │   (your working
   I    │    not watching)   │    coalition)
   N    │                    │
   F  ──┼────────────────────┼────────────────────
   L    │                    │
   U    │   MONITOR          │   KEEP INFORMED
   E    │   (low effort)     │   (loud, low power —
   N    │                    │    but they set norms)
   C  LOW│                   │
        └────────────────────┴────────────────────
          LOW            INTEREST            HIGH

The dangerous quadrant is top-left. High influence, currently not paying attention. A Risk director or a regional MD who hasn’t engaged yet, who will engage the moment something goes wrong, at maximum volume, with no context. Brief them before they need to care.

The under-rated quadrant is bottom-right. Low formal power, high interest, often highly networked. They set the informal norm. See Social Norms and Influence.

Step 4 — the moves

For a…	Do this
Champion	Give them a visible role and something concrete to do. Unused champions cool off.
Supporter	Ask for one specific public act, not general support.
Neutral	Find out what they want from the change. Neutrality is usually “nobody’s told me what’s in it for my area.”
Sceptic	Meet privately, listen properly, and find the part where they’re right. Concede it publicly.
Blocker	Understand what they’re protecting. Most blocking is defensive, not hostile. Escalate only when you’ve genuinely tried.

The best move with a senior sceptic

Ask them to define the conditions under which they’d support it. Write those conditions down and read them back. Either you get a workable list — in which case you’ve converted them and gained a design review — or they can’t produce one, which tells the room something without you having to say it.

Step 5 — the coalition

You don’t need everyone. You need a guiding coalition with enough authority, credibility and expertise to make decisions stick.

The coalition

Sponsor (authority to decide and fund): ___________ Credible operator (people believe them): ___________ Technical authority (knows how it really works): ___________ Connector (knows everyone): ___________ A converted sceptic — worth more than three enthusiasts: ___________

Step 6 — the influence question

For your top blocker: whose opinion do they actually listen to?

Fill in

Blocker: ___________ Influenced by: ___________ That person’s stance: ___________ The indirect route: ___________

Working the indirect route is often faster than the direct one, and doesn’t cost you the relationship.

Refresh cadence

Stakeholder maps rot. Review monthly, and always after: a reorg, a departure, a bad incident, or budget season. A single leadership change can invalidate the whole grid.

→ Sponsor Briefing Pack · Champion Network Playbook · T — Stakeholder Note

← Back to the Behavioural Change Toolkit

Last updated: 11 August 2026